Cited by 88Antifungal resistance and susceptibilityHIV/AIDS oral health manifestationsFungal Infections and Studies

Itraconazole cyclodextrin solution for fluconazole-refractory oropharyngeal candidiasis in AIDS: correlation of clinical response with in vitro susceptibility

Phillips, Peter, Zemcov, Janet, Mahmood, Wafeeq, Montaner, Julio S.G., Craib, Kevin, Clarke, Alison M.·1996·AIDS

Abstract

Objective To evaluate the efficacy of itraconazole cyclodextrin solution in fluconazole-refractory oropharyngeal candidiasis (OPC), and to correlate clinical outcome with in vitro susceptibility and serum azole levels. Design A prospective, open-label, intervention study. Setting A university hospital, which serves as the provincial HIV referral center. Patients and interventions Thirty six HIV-infected individuals referred for fluconazole-refractory OPC were evaluated prospectively between May 1993 and March 1995, including clinical assessment, serum azole levels, and susceptibility testing of Candida spp, isolates. Itraconazole solution was administered orally at a daily dose of 200 mg for 14 days, followed by suppressive therapy. Thirty-four patients were evaluable. Main outcome measure Resolution of oral pseudomembranous lesions. Results Initial isolates were Candida albicans (n = 33), C. glabrata (n = 1), C. krusei (n = 1), and mixed infection with C. albicans and C. krusei (n = 1). Fluconazole serum levels obtained at the time of failed therapy ranged from 4.7 to 40 mg/l (median, 12.9 mg/l). Itraconazole was generally well tolerated. Clinical responses were observed in 65% (22 out of 34) of evaluable cases. Among the responders, relapse had occurred within 2 months for four (36%) out of 11 cases who continued with follow-up. The median fluconazole minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC) was 64 mg/l for isolates from fluconazole-refractory cases, compared with a median of…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/00002030-199610000-00009

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Between 64% and 80% of patients with fluconazole-refractory oropharyngeal candidiasis respond to itraconazole solution.

    “Between 64% and 80% of patients with fluconazole-refractory infections will respond to treatment with itraconazole solution [268][269][270].”

    From Guidelines for Treatment of Candidiasis (2004) · cites this paper as [268]

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Phillips, P., Zemcov, J., Mahmood, W., Montaner, J. S. G., Craib, K., & Clarke, A. M.
Affiliations
University of British Columbia (CA)
Corresponding author
  • Phillips, Peter
  • Mahmood, Wafeeq
  • Montaner, Julio S.G.
  • Craib, Kevin
Venue
AIDS
Published
1996-10
Volume
10
Issue
12
Pages
1369-1376
ISSN
0269-9370 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2002155710
Cited by
88
References
0
Citations by year
2024: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 3
FWCI
5.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • AIDS (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › Antifungal resistance and susceptibility
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › HIV/AIDS oral health manifestations
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Fungal Infections and Studies
Keywords
oropharyngeal candidiasis, HIV infection, Candida albicans, Candida glabrata, Candida krusei, antifungal susceptibility, clinical response
MeSH terms
Adult, Candidiasis, Oral, Cyclodextrins, Drug Resistance, Microbial, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Oropharynx, Prospective Studies, Solutions, Fluconazole, AIDS-Related Opportunistic Infections, Itraconazole

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review